Literature DB >> 24973046

Single- versus dual-console robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: impact on intraoperative and postoperative outcomes in a teaching institution.

Monica S C Morgan1, Nabeel A Shakir, Maurilio Garcia-Gil, Asim Ozayar, Jeffrey C Gahan, Justin I Friedlander, Claus G Roehrborn, Jeffrey A Cadeddu.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) using a dual versus single-console system in a resident training program using intraoperative, perioperative and postoperative measures.
METHODS: Patients with PCa who underwent RALP prior to and after implementing a dual-console system at an academic institution were reviewed from 2006-2012. All surgeries were performed by a single-faculty surgeon well after the learning curve was established. In all cases, chief residents participated in the surgery and performed progressively more portions. Demographic, intraoperative and pathologic parameters were obtained. Continence and erectile function were assessed at 6 and 12 months. Postoperative complications were graded using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Predictors of outcomes on univariate analysis were included in multivariate logistic or linear models.
RESULTS: Of 381 patients, 185 and 196 underwent single- or dual-console RALP, respectively. There was a significant decrease in mean operative time using the dual-console system (222 vs. 171 min, p < 0.0001) as well as in the incidence of intraoperative complications (8.65 vs. 1.53%, p < 0.0001) and postoperative complications (14.1 vs. 6.63%, p = 0.03.) Complications of Clavien grade ≥3a occurred more frequently with a single-console system (7 vs. 1%, p = 0.003.) Differences persisted when controlling for potential confounders by multivariate regression. Postoperative measures of continence, erectile function and the rate of biochemical recurrence were similar between cohorts.
CONCLUSIONS: When training resident surgeons to perform RALP, a dual-console system may improve intraoperative and perioperative outcomes. The dual-console may represent a safer, more efficient modality for robotic surgical education as compared to a single-console system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24973046     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-014-1349-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  10 in total

Review 1.  Training and learning robotic surgery, time for a more structured approach: a systematic review.

Authors:  H W R Schreuder; R Wolswijk; R P Zweemer; M P Schijven; R H M Verheijen
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2011-10-10       Impact factor: 6.531

2.  Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: what is the learning curve?

Authors:  S Duke Herrell; Joseph A Smith
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  Mentoring console improves collaboration and teaching in surgical robotics.

Authors:  Eric J Hanly; Brian E Miller; Rajesh Kumar; Christopher J Hasser; Eve Coste-Maniere; Mark A Talamini; Alexander A Aurora; Noah S Schenkman; Michael R Marohn
Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 1.878

4.  Dual-console robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic surgery with respect to surgical outcomes in a gynecologic oncology fellowship program.

Authors:  Ashlee L Smith; Thomas C Krivak; Eirwen M Scott; Jose Alejandro Rauh-Hain; Paniti Sukumvanich; Alexander B Olawaiye; Scott D Richard
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2012-05-18       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 5.  The role of the dual console in robotic surgical training.

Authors:  Eduardo Fernandes; Enrique Elli; Piercristoforo Giulianotti
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2013-08-22       Impact factor: 3.982

Review 6.  Learning tools and simulation in robotic surgery: state of the art.

Authors:  Nicolas C Buchs; François Pugin; Francesco Volonté; Philippe Morel
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Trends in radical prostatectomy: centralization, robotics, and access to urologic cancer care.

Authors:  Karyn B Stitzenberg; Yu-Ning Wong; Matthew E Nielsen; Brian L Egleston; Robert G Uzzo
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Small animal magnetic resonance imaging: an efficient tool to assess liver volume and intrahepatic vascular anatomy.

Authors:  Emmanuel Melloul; Dimitri A Raptis; Andreas Boss; Thomas Pfammater; Christoph Tschuor; Yinghua Tian; Rolf Graf; Pierre-Alain Clavien; Mickael Lesurtel
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2013-11-16       Impact factor: 2.192

9.  Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey.

Authors:  Daniel Dindo; Nicolas Demartines; Pierre-Alain Clavien
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Impact of fellowship training on one-year outcomes of robotic-assisted prostatectomy.

Authors:  David D Thiel; Ryan Hutchinson; Nancy Diehl; Andrea Tavlarides; Adrienne Williams; Alexander S Parker
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2012 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

  10 in total
  8 in total

1.  Single- versus dual-console robotic surgery: dual improves the educational experience for trainees.

Authors:  S S Goonewardene; M Brown; B Challacombe
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 2.  Robotic surgery for gastric tumor: current status and new approaches.

Authors:  Seung Hyun Lim; Hae Min Lee; Taeil Son; Woo Jin Hyung; Hyoung-Il Kim
Journal:  Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2016-04-07

3.  Initial experience with a dual-console robotic-assisted platform for training in colorectal surgery.

Authors:  J C Bolger; M P Broe; M A Zarog; A Looney; K McKevitt; D Walsh; S Giri; C Peirce; J C Coffey
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2017-09-19       Impact factor: 3.781

4.  Impact of robotic single and dual console systems in the training of minimally invasive gynecology surgery (MIGS) fellows.

Authors:  Mateo G Leon; Aakriti R Carrubba; Christopher C DeStephano; Michael G Heckman; Emily C Craver; Tri A Dinh
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-01-13

5.  Initial Experience in Rectal Cancer Surgery for the Next Generation of Robotic Surgeons Trained in a Dual Console System.

Authors:  Manabu Yamamoto; Keigo Ashida; Kazushi Hara; Ken Sugezawa; Chihiro Uejima; Akimitsu Tanio; Yuji Shishido; Kozo Miyatani; Takehiko Hanaki; Kyoichi Kihara; Tomoyuki Matsunaga; Naruo Tokuyasu; Teruhisa Sakamoto; Yoshiyuki Fujiwara
Journal:  Yonago Acta Med       Date:  2021-06-23       Impact factor: 1.641

Review 6.  Robotic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: Current state and future perspective.

Authors:  Takatoshi Matsuyama; Yusuke Kinugasa; Yasuaki Nakajima; Kazuyuki Kojima
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol Surg       Date:  2018-09-05

Review 7.  Complications in robotic urological surgeries and how to avoid them: A systematic review.

Authors:  Rafael Rocha Tourinho-Barbosa; Marcos Tobias-Machado; Adalberto Castro-Alfaro; Gabriel Ogaya-Pinies; Xavier Cathelineau; Rafael Sanchez-Salas
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2017-12-14

8.  Robotic Dual-Console Distal Pancreatectomy: Could it be Considered a Safe Approach and Surgical Teaching even in Pancreatic Surgery? A Retrospective Observational Study Cohort.

Authors:  M De Pastena; R Salvia; S Paiella; G Deiro; E Bannone; A Balduzzi; T Giuliani; L Casetti; M Ramera; C Filippini; G Montagnini; L Landoni; A Esposito
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2021-07-24       Impact factor: 3.352

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.